click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13
on the facebook, we see this picture all the time now of president bush, like you just showed, next to bradley manning. the question is bradley manning is forgotten and locked up somewhere, whereas bush who started the war is walking around free. what is the press doing about that? >> well, the press is covering the trial of bradley manning. and you are right. bradley manning remains in custody. the trial is under way, and the trial is getting a lot of press coverage. >> when you first started covering the white house in the reagan era, cbs news and the evening news dominated where people got their news and information. we were talking earlier about social media. it changed over the years. has it changed the way you do your job? >> i don't think so. we still try to cover the news on a daily basis for both morning and evening news cycles. we doo, however -- we do, however, make use of social news media. it has changed it in that respect. we don't hold back anymore. in those days, 1981, when i started covering the white house, we saved our best material for the evening news. we can't do that any
bush reopened the refurbished white house briefing room and had this to say about the white house press corps. [video clip] >> why don't you all yell simultaneously? [laughter] really loudly. that way, you might get noticed. i will listen, internalize, play like i will answer the question, and then smile as you and say thanks. thanks for such a solid, sound question. i will cut the ribbon. and then you yell. i cogitate. then i smile and wave. [laughter] host: bill plante. guest: he had a playful moment, but he was getting as something that was true. they all try to get the attention of the president. he can choose to call on someone or choose not to answer. it is in his hands. that used to be the norm for news conferences. somewhere around the reagan era, it got very sedate. people waited to be called on. the president has a list already prepared of the reporters on whom he is going to call. it is hard to get recognized. president reagan once recognized sarah mcclendon, a venerable reporter from texas, a woman who did not take no for an answer. he said, ok, i would take one from you. sh
into this with president bush with illegal war. now president obama is bringing the soldiers back and the war is over. where are the funds from that to be utilized back into society and all the oil we got from you is dam hugh sane. why isn't going back to the fact the reason we got into this is what happened with bush and his administration and obama had to pull us out of that. nobody was complaining about hutdown and all these problems that happened. host: we'll leave it there. guest: republicans were hitting deficit spending that the budget that the cr isn't addressing the deficit problem. you put two words on a credit card and didn't pay for them and that's why we have deficit. the war funding is an interesting element. it was a fight between democrats and republicans. democrats cut spending. how they arrived at savings in their bument and republicans said those numbers aren't realistic. host: trnt republicans say thrg have been increases in spending by the obama administration at pushed the debt from five or six years ago guest: how much debt there was when president obama came to office and how
. are going to make george bush the president of the republic now for quite a while, and we will continue that. e really only have 1 1/2 political parties in the country now. there is a misreading of the republican party in terms of what the problems were. the fact of the matter is republican party is the dominant political party from but the party5, ran out of gas in the summer of 2005, the effects of the war, katrina, people say, what is wrong with the republicans? they have had seven or eight years now where republicans are roaming around in terms of their future, and they are not closer now than they were then. the political parties cannot fix the problem of a party, but they have to avoid becoming a liability. the job of the political party is to make a flat playing field, so the future of either party will determine who the nominee is and the next president is. until republicans take the white house back, they will be defined as a congressional party, the tea party, great for us, and whoever is the craziest person gets on tv and gets the attention -- that will not change for the next thr
budgets in the last 40 years. wasn't under president reagan or the first president bush or the second president bush, but 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001. under president clinton and then president bush came in and did a big tax cut in 2001. put us out of balance for a long period of time. and during the period of time when the budget was imbalance the last four times out of 40 years, the revenue was coming in, was higher than it is in any year in the republican budget that's before us now. and what that tells you is that their budget approach is trying o seek balance on the backs of everybody else. by really cutting into those important investments that have helped power our company, by violating important commitments to seniors. and in the end, by raising taxes on middle-income people. why else would they not have joined democrats in sending policy statement to the ways and means committee that says when you go about eliminating tax preferences, don't hit middle-income taxpayers in the process. in fact, mr. chairman, if you look at the mortgage interest deduction, for example, mortgage in
that began 10 years ago when president george w. bush launched a war of choice in iraq. dragging our country into a costly, bitter conflict based on falsehoods and hyperbole. it took president obama fulfilling his campaign promise to end the iraq war and we are grateful that he brought the war to an end. but we must not forget how we got into the war in the first place. so that these mistakes are not repeated. we were told there were weapons of mass destruction. we were warned about mushroom clouds. now i offered an amendment at the time that would have taken us down a different path. it would have required the united states to work through the united nations inspectors and maximizing diplomacy to determine whether or not iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction. unfortunately my amendment failed by a vote of 72-355. what happened from there we all know the tragic consequences. president bush dragged this country into an unnecessary war. no weapons of mass destruction were ever found. the cost of the iraq war soared far beyond what was projected. we lost 4,400 american troops in iraq
budgets and the one that george bush inherited from bill clinton. in each case taxes as a percentage of the total economy were over 20%. in this republican fantasy land budgets are balanced with revenues at 19% of the economy, yet meeting the needs of 78 million more seniors and a infrastructure deficit that is growing as america is falling apart. clearly this is not remotely possible if we are going to enjoy anything like our current quality of life. there is a real world intersection of budget saving opportunities with potential areas of agreement. health care reform is one. but not just by shifting the burden to seniors and disabled as the republicans propose in their fantasy budget. my home state of oregon is the middle of an exciting demonstration of how to squeeze out the waste we all know is there and realign incentives. instead of the empty ritual of pretending to repeal obamacare, let's work together to accelerate reform for all americans. if the oregon experiment works, and frankly many of these efeshencies by the way are already achieved in other parts of the country and w
that president bush's economic adviser was fired for predicting that the war might $200$100 billion to billion. he was off by at least a factor of 10, at least, and we will hear from our second panel, maybe much more than that. ask,ly, we are going to from the u.s. point of view, what are the geopolitical, military and strategic lessons in so far as we can see them from this near and far vantage point. what are the take homes from this conflict? a reallyssembled superb roster of experts to address these issues, beginning with this wonderful first panel. knows onuch each of us and conflict firsthand, looking around this room, there is a huge amount of wisdom here , but i know that all of us will go home a good deal wiser. thank you for joining us. i am really thrilled to turn over to the moderator of our first panel. everyone in this room and watching on television is probably familiar with his work. 10 years ago, he was covering the beginning of the war for kuwait city, and then in baghdad. he later wrote "imperial life in the emerald city" -- one of the best of many books about the war come a
, under the bush administration, they had this idea to take the postal service and the postal service alone and no other agency in federal government, and make them prepay their retirement systems 75 years into the future. let me give you an example of what that means that means they're prepaying the pension for someone who is not born today, for their retirement a half century down the road. no oragency, no private company would do that. but we are requiring the postal service. so when you hear the postal service is losing money, almost every single dollar of those losses is due to the prepayment of this unusual requirement that only the postal service has to pay. so what happens, the response? clearly, i think this is an attempt to try to privatize the system. to take away a system that i think so many people have relied on for so many years in this country. but this is what we see happening system of recently, we saw there was a move to go from six-day delivery to five-day delivery. when you start to cut back on delivery, it has a real ramification on people, on what they're going
to make sure they are realized. these integration problems pop out of the bushes after the merger has been consummated. we have seen enough of this and have enough of a track record to say that ok, this is probably something we should expect to happen. i think it is important to balance or account for those probable system integration problems at the time the merger is reviewed because they cut significantly into the efficiencies promised by the airline. if they cut significantly into them and those costs are passed on to consumers, the deficiencies are not as great as they were originally forecast. this is something new antitrust analysis should be accounted for? >> thank-you very much. mr. mcgee? >> thank you. one other thing we wanted to point out is we're concerned not just about the merger which we have detailed... today but also the macro effects even on the pricing issue as we talked about when you have three network carriers as opposed to 6, 7, or eight -- we have seen in the past would fare increases that one or two airlines would match the fare increase and others would not and t
was in the bush administration. >> excuse me. not that old. i will talk about is the one that will be argued tomorrow. it is called hollingsworth against perry. it began with the california supreme court ruling that as a matter of california state lot of laws banning same-sex marriages were unconstitutional with the california constitution. immediate become a process was begun in november, 2008, and the voters in california passed an initiative, an amendment to the constitution that says marriage shall only be between persons of the opposite sex, one man and one woman from outlying same-sex marriage. at the same time, california high already in place well before the first decision statutes that created domestic partnerships that provide all of the legal rights to same-sex did, butas marriage they could not call themselves married. the reaction was fairly prompt. the case was filed in federal court after an unsuccessful case in state court, challenging the constitutionality this time under the federal constitution of the ban on same-sex marriages. the governor of california, and the attorney
will from march 1910 but it doesn't treat them as operations began in the country. before president bush spoke for about five minutes that evening and we will show you those tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. next week marks the start of a recess in congress. the house completed its work for the week and will not return until the week of april 8. earlier, the chamber passed the republican budget plan. the 2010to repeal health care law. it aims to balance the budget over the next 10 years. fundingse also passed for the government to the rest of the year. speaking of the senate, the chamber is live right now. they're working on amendments right now. we do not expect a vote until tomorrow, with a final passage vote possible. follow the senate live now on c- span2. his weeklyr holds briefing and talks about the upcoming republican agenda. this is 10 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. every family in america must balance their budget. passedouse republicans their plan. alps improve people's lives and addresses things i think they most care about. it means more jobs and higher wages for
an took us on a path of fiscal soundness. it was totally reversed in the bush years, our republican colleagues didn't say a word, they said no problem, it's the appropriate percentage of g.d.p. new york problem with the deaf zit, they never complained about it. but now with their initiatives, the ryan republican job killer budget is making matters worse. in terms of reducing the deficit. because it deprives of our economy of the very initiatives that would create growth. the education of our people, lifetime learning, for the american people. investments in education, as i said, nothing brings more money. investments in jobs, infrahave structure, energy, innovation, absent in the ryan republican job killer budget. medicare, so important to the stability of america's working families, the provisions in the affordable care act that affect medicare have already demonstrated that we're halting the rapid increase in cost of health care spending system of that is what has enabled the c.b.o. to say with more promise that we can use a different baseline to reduce the deficit and that has be
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13